Go to the OCDLA website
OCDLA HOME
 
A Book from the Library of Defense
Namespaces
Variants
Actions

Library Collections

Webinars & Podcasts
Motions
Disclaimer

Oregon Appellate Court, February 5, 2020

From OCDLA Library of Defense
< Blog:Case Reviews(Difference between revisions)
Jump to: navigation, search

by: Rankin Johnson • February 11, 2020 • no comments

(Created page with " <summary hidden> TRIAL PROCEDURE - Preservation and making a record </summary> '''Summarized by Rankin Johnson, OCDLA''' '''TRIAL PROCEDURE - Preservation and making a re...")
 
Line 10: Line 10:
 
Camping ordinances do not violate constitution. Affirmed.
 
Camping ordinances do not violate constitution. Affirmed.
  
−
Defendant was arrested for camping in Portland. Before trial, he filed a motion to dismiss, later captioned a demurrer, raising numerous arguments. The Court of Appeals held that he failed to make a factual record showing that there were no homeless shelters available and that his as-applied arguments could not be raised pre-trial.
+
[https://link.ocdla.org/soll/XXX State v. XXX]  302 Or App XXX (February 5, 2020) (XXX) (XXX County, XXX)
  
−
Ortega, concurring, would have held that the Eighth Amendment prohibits punishing a homeless person for camping when no alternative is available, but agreed that defendant had not made an adequate record.
+
'''TRIAL PROCEDURE - Preservation and making a record'''
  
−
James, concurring, believed that because defendant's argument applied to a class of people it was a proper facial challenge, which James would have rejected on the merits.
+
Camping ordinances do not violate constitution. Affirmed.
  
−
[https://link.ocdla.org/soll/A159139 State v. Barrett]  302 Or App 23 (January 29, 2020) (DeVore, Ortega concurring, James concurring) (Multnomah County, Bushong)
+
[https://link.ocdla.org/soll/XXX State v. XXX]  302 Or App XXX (February 5, 2020) (XXX) (XXX County, XXX)
 +
 
 +
'''TRIAL PROCEDURE - Preservation and making a record'''
 +
 
 +
Camping ordinances do not violate constitution. Affirmed.
 +
 
 +
[https://link.ocdla.org/soll/XXX State v. XXX]  302 Or App XXX (February 5, 2020) (XXX) (XXX County, XXX)
 +
 
 +
'''TRIAL PROCEDURE - Preservation and making a record'''
 +
 
 +
Camping ordinances do not violate constitution. Affirmed.
 +
 
 +
[https://link.ocdla.org/soll/XXX State v. XXX]  302 Or App XXX (February 5, 2020) (XXX) (XXX County, XXX)
 +
 
 +
'''TRIAL PROCEDURE - Preservation and making a record'''
 +
 
 +
Camping ordinances do not violate constitution. Affirmed.
 +
 
 +
[https://link.ocdla.org/soll/XXX State v. XXX]  302 Or App XXX (February 5, 2020) (XXX) (XXX County, XXX)
 +
 
 +
'''TRIAL PROCEDURE - Preservation and making a record'''
 +
 
 +
Camping ordinances do not violate constitution. Affirmed.
 +
 
 +
[https://link.ocdla.org/soll/XXX State v. XXX]  302 Or App XXX (February 5, 2020) (XXX) (XXX County, XXX)
 +
 
 +
'''TRIAL PROCEDURE - Preservation and making a record'''
 +
 
 +
Camping ordinances do not violate constitution. Affirmed.
 +
 
 +
[https://link.ocdla.org/soll/XXX State v. XXX]  302 Or App XXX (February 5, 2020) (XXX) (XXX County, XXX)
 +
 
 +
'''TRIAL PROCEDURE - Preservation and making a record'''
 +
 
 +
Camping ordinances do not violate constitution. Affirmed.
 +
 
 +
[https://link.ocdla.org/soll/XXX State v. XXX]  302 Or App XXX (February 5, 2020) (XXX) (XXX County, XXX)
 +
 
 +
'''TRIAL PROCEDURE - Preservation and making a record'''
 +
 
 +
Camping ordinances do not violate constitution. Affirmed.
 +
 
 +
[https://link.ocdla.org/soll/XXX State v. XXX]  302 Or App XXX (February 5, 2020) (XXX) (XXX County, XXX)
 +
 
 +
'''TRIAL PROCEDURE - Preservation and making a record'''
 +
 
 +
Camping ordinances do not violate constitution. Affirmed.
 +
 
 +
[https://link.ocdla.org/soll/XXX State v. XXX]  302 Or App XXX (February 5, 2020) (XXX) (XXX County, XXX)
 +
 
 +
'''TRIAL PROCEDURE - Preservation and making a record'''
 +
 
 +
Camping ordinances do not violate constitution. Affirmed.
 +
 
 +
[https://link.ocdla.org/soll/XXX State v. XXX]  302 Or App XXX (February 5, 2020) (XXX) (XXX County, XXX)
 +
 
 +
'''TRIAL PROCEDURE - Preservation and making a record'''
 +
 
 +
Camping ordinances do not violate constitution. Affirmed.
 +
 
 +
[https://link.ocdla.org/soll/XXX State v. XXX]  302 Or App XXX (February 5, 2020) (XXX) (XXX County, XXX)
 +
 
 +
'''TRIAL PROCEDURE - Preservation and making a record'''
 +
 
 +
Camping ordinances do not violate constitution. Affirmed.
 +
 
 +
[https://link.ocdla.org/soll/XXX State v. XXX]  302 Or App XXX (February 5, 2020) (XXX) (XXX County, XXX)
 +
 
 +
'''TRIAL PROCEDURE - Preservation and making a record'''
 +
 
 +
Camping ordinances do not violate constitution. Affirmed.
 +
 
 +
[https://link.ocdla.org/soll/XXX State v. XXX]  302 Or App XXX (February 5, 2020) (XXX) (XXX County, XXX)
 +
 
 +
'''TRIAL PROCEDURE - Preservation and making a record'''
 +
 
 +
Camping ordinances do not violate constitution. Affirmed.
 +
 
 +
[https://link.ocdla.org/soll/XXX State v. XXX]  302 Or App XXX (February 5, 2020) (XXX) (XXX County, XXX)

Revision as of 22:18, February 7, 2020

Summarized by Rankin Johnson, OCDLA

TRIAL PROCEDURE - Preservation and making a record

Camping ordinances do not violate constitution. Affirmed.

State v. XXX 302 Or App XXX (February 5, 2020) (XXX) (XXX County, XXX)

TRIAL PROCEDURE - Preservation and making a record

Camping ordinances do not violate constitution. Affirmed.

State v. XXX 302 Or App XXX (February 5, 2020) (XXX) (XXX County, XXX)

TRIAL PROCEDURE - Preservation and making a record

Camping ordinances do not violate constitution. Affirmed.

State v. XXX 302 Or App XXX (February 5, 2020) (XXX) (XXX County, XXX)

TRIAL PROCEDURE - Preservation and making a record

Camping ordinances do not violate constitution. Affirmed.

State v. XXX 302 Or App XXX (February 5, 2020) (XXX) (XXX County, XXX)

TRIAL PROCEDURE - Preservation and making a record

Camping ordinances do not violate constitution. Affirmed.

State v. XXX 302 Or App XXX (February 5, 2020) (XXX) (XXX County, XXX)

TRIAL PROCEDURE - Preservation and making a record

Camping ordinances do not violate constitution. Affirmed.

State v. XXX 302 Or App XXX (February 5, 2020) (XXX) (XXX County, XXX)

TRIAL PROCEDURE - Preservation and making a record

Camping ordinances do not violate constitution. Affirmed.

State v. XXX 302 Or App XXX (February 5, 2020) (XXX) (XXX County, XXX)

TRIAL PROCEDURE - Preservation and making a record

Camping ordinances do not violate constitution. Affirmed.

State v. XXX 302 Or App XXX (February 5, 2020) (XXX) (XXX County, XXX)

TRIAL PROCEDURE - Preservation and making a record

Camping ordinances do not violate constitution. Affirmed.

State v. XXX 302 Or App XXX (February 5, 2020) (XXX) (XXX County, XXX)

TRIAL PROCEDURE - Preservation and making a record

Camping ordinances do not violate constitution. Affirmed.

State v. XXX 302 Or App XXX (February 5, 2020) (XXX) (XXX County, XXX)

TRIAL PROCEDURE - Preservation and making a record

Camping ordinances do not violate constitution. Affirmed.

State v. XXX 302 Or App XXX (February 5, 2020) (XXX) (XXX County, XXX)

TRIAL PROCEDURE - Preservation and making a record

Camping ordinances do not violate constitution. Affirmed.

State v. XXX 302 Or App XXX (February 5, 2020) (XXX) (XXX County, XXX)

TRIAL PROCEDURE - Preservation and making a record

Camping ordinances do not violate constitution. Affirmed.

State v. XXX 302 Or App XXX (February 5, 2020) (XXX) (XXX County, XXX)

TRIAL PROCEDURE - Preservation and making a record

Camping ordinances do not violate constitution. Affirmed.

State v. XXX 302 Or App XXX (February 5, 2020) (XXX) (XXX County, XXX)

TRIAL PROCEDURE - Preservation and making a record

Camping ordinances do not violate constitution. Affirmed.

State v. XXX 302 Or App XXX (February 5, 2020) (XXX) (XXX County, XXX)

Retrieved from "https://libraryofdefense.ocdla.org/index.php?title=Blog:Case_Reviews/Oregon_Appellate_Court,_February_5,_2020&oldid=29854"